So that we're all clear, here's the original email of this thread:
Hi all,
I was wondering what y'alls thoughts are on what the current browser compliance standards should be for international audiences. I develop websites for a variety of non-profits which want to ensure the sites are accessible by the majority of users in developing countries. I know that the sites need to be low bandwidth, 508 compliant/highly usable.
For a long time, I have been using Netscape 4.75 as the lowest common denominator in terms of browser compliance but am wondering if this is long out of date, especially as this browser is not fully compliant with CSS 1 (let alone CSS 2, XML or newer HTML standards). The good thing about >>508 compliance is that the site needs to degrade gracefully without a CSS so I am not worried about a site being totally unusable (just ugly or harder to use).
Obviously, if the site is intentionally directed at a specific audience in a specific country, then we will make the site supportive of that specific environment. But I also need a general rule of thumb where we have a broad audience of "Development community" or "General Public".
Suggestions, thoughts, experiences, all welcome!!
Siobhan Green
Taran, so in talking about now VS. the future, are we talking about things like NS7.2, IE6.0, Opera7.2 (or the current version number), things like the current browsers? I have been suggesting ways that old browsers on old machines can surf with no trouble. I saw that as the origin of this conversation. If you see something different, let's redirect this conversation. I understood browser standards compliance to relate the the minimum browser to design a site for.
Taran, you said: "You should be able to turn on your computer and do exactly what you want with it without dinking in the background. Linux is getting there after Windows paved the way, OS/X simply works and I still long for the days of the Vic-20. The truth is that the *lack of enforced standards* is an issue."
If you are using a computer that is antiquated, I don't agree with you. If you are using an older computer and an older browser, you should be able to do exactly what you want to do *with* some dinking around in the background, the less dinking the better. I propose a minimum amount of dinking, changing one setting. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on that being a necessity. Bottom line, though, is that -- even with an older browser -- you should be able to do what you want to do.
The possible solution I see to this problem you suggest is two different versions of a Web site. We cannot possibly expect companies to design their sites by 1999 standards of Web browsing, the standards that using NS4.7 suggests. We might be able to request that they provide a version that would work on such technology, but I venture to guess those companies would say the same thing I am: just turn off style sheets (a relatively simple thing to do) and the site works just fine.
And I'm not mixing issues. Perhaps I'm *missing* one, but I'm not mixing them. How can we talk about browser standards in relation to browsers that already exist? Aren't we really talking about what is the baseline browser used? We aren't talking about how to build a better browser, are we? Are we talking about creating a browser that can be installed on older machines and render current Web sites accurately? That's not the conversation I jumped in on nor the idea I saw started (though it might be an intersting one to pursue).
In short, what exactly do you see as broken? The old browser that's on an old machine that someone "on the other side of the digital divide" cannot replace? Or the code being implemented on Web sites that cause those sites to render poorly on that old browser on that old machine? I think we have a semantic misunderstanding here. Let's clarify; I think that we agree, we're just using different language to express a similar point.
-todd seal
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
